Thanks. I think it’s most fair to count what a language has without extensions but thanks for the correction. To that end, Haskell basically has Dependent Types now too if you pile 10 extensions together (singletons, linear types, and others) and squint a little. It’ll easily be the first production-grade language to do so.
That’s not realistic or “fair” - most Haskell projects will use a dozen or so extensions easily. GHC has been a platform for language experimentation for a long time; standardisation efforts keep on cropping up in annual surveys. (Eg, swapping in Text for String in base is long overdue, but it’s a hold over from days where FP pedagogy was seen as more important.)
Thanks. I think it’s most fair to count what a language has without extensions but thanks for the correction. To that end, Haskell basically has Dependent Types now too if you pile 10 extensions together (singletons, linear types, and others) and squint a little. It’ll easily be the first production-grade language to do so.
That’s not realistic or “fair” - most Haskell projects will use a dozen or so extensions easily. GHC has been a platform for language experimentation for a long time; standardisation efforts keep on cropping up in annual surveys. (Eg, swapping in Text for String in base is long overdue, but it’s a hold over from days where FP pedagogy was seen as more important.)